MRF welcomes additional analysis of Men B vaccine

13 November 2013

Meningitis Research Foundation (MRF) welcomes news that the question of whether to implement a vital new vaccine against the deadly disease meningococcal group B meningitis and septicaemia (MenB) is to be considered further using updated information.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) confirmed it will be re-running its cost effectiveness model for the vaccine in its 2 October minutes published today (13 November 2013).

The JCVI has been considering the vaccine since 2011 but in interim minutes published in July 2013 said it was unlikely to recommend its use in the UK. The Committee invited this charity, and others, to respond ahead of its October meeting and following those submissions had indicated more work was required. But the publication of the October meeting minutes confirms they are seeking further analysis.

MRF Chief Executive Christopher Head says: “The UK has the highest rates of child death in Europe and MenB contributes to this terrible fact. We are very pleased to see that our formal response, and the extensive campaigning undertaken by the charity and its supporters this summer, has been influential.

“It is a very encouraging sign but we cannot be complacent. This devastating disease brings death and disability to hundreds of families every year and costs millions in health care and litigation. We simply cannot let MenB to drop off the radar while the new analysis is underway. We are urging our members to contact their MP and get letters to the Secretary of State for Health by New Years Day. Then hopefully, 2014 will be a happy new year for MenB and everyone who has been campaigning against this disease for decades.”

The minutes include a note that the JCVI members are acutely aware of the seriousness of meningococcal infection for those affected, their families and health professionals, and the impact of the disease on the NHS: “JCVI welcomed the availability of additional evidence and perspectives, and were resolved to undertake a further careful review of the evidence.”